Sexism in the World

While PMing a new-found friend, I somehow or another got on the topic of sexism, meaning judging a person based soley on the fact that they are male or female. I went on to this thread to see if anyone had ideas, and though the topic was close to what I had in mind it wasn't quite what I was thinking.

Here are my thoughts. A lot of peole think that women should not be in military combat because (to put it bluntly) the war will not stop hjust because her Aunt Flo decided to pay her a visit. Others don't think that a man should be a beautician or a nurse or a secretary because that is not manly enough. There are times where a person won't get a job because they are of a certain gender.

My questions to you are these:

1. Does this happen in your culture? How often? Can you give examples?
2. Do you personally believe in the idea that there a some things a man can do that a woman cannot and visa versa?

Nobody should make a judgement on ability based on gender. We may not be the same in every way but we are equal overall. Our behaviour is also a spectrum and men and women overlap even in the characterstics where we are most distanced.

Personally I think that the hardest hurdle facing women in the workplace is the kids issue.

If you are child-rearing age, particulaly about 30, all employers are going to be suspicious of a women becoming a mother. The reasons are very simple:

Maternity leave
Disruption to the general workforce
Risk of never returning to work (after all that expensive training)
Disruption to the working day (phonecalls to nannies, doctors appointments, kids are sick, etc.)
Change in life priorities.

You can't blame a company for that. But it is tough on the women involved. and there are laws in place in many countries to try and even it up for the mothers and I think a balance is required.

The other problem relating to this and sexism is that men are not able to take off time to look after the kids. I think it is still seen as the mother's job. Not necessarily by the husband but by the working environment. If it were not so, and parental dutes were more evenly shared then I think the pressure on, and fear of, working mothers would be less.

PS. Just to point out to other foreros that the euphamism Aunt Flo means menustration, something I didn't now until that recent thread.

Well... As a matter of fact I also think so.
But I think that any human being should not be in military combat.
1- Yes, we are almost out of the map but our culture belowns to the Wester world.
I think many companies avoid hiring women due to what Xarruc said. Maternity and stuff related with it (by the way Xarruc gracias por la aclaración. No todos sabemos inglés como si fuésemos nativos)
2- No, I think it is mostly a cultural stigma (except for works that require a lot of force)

1. Does this happen in your culture? How often? Can you give examples?

Happens all the time. Both in my native and my adopted cultures. One example: for the job of a receptionist it's very likely that, all things being equal, if men and women both apply for it, the job will go to the woman if she looks more personable than the man.

2. Do you personally believe in the idea that there a some things a man can do that a woman cannot and visa versa?

Yes. But it mainly has to do with physiological functions. It's undeniable: for example, I cannot mother a child, but I could father him.

[I know, I know... I understand what the question meant to ask, but it's not what it actually says]

However, I am not a medical doctor, and I don't know how much sexism influences their findings in their research, but I remember reading somewhere that some kind of study or other found that there are definite and marked differences in the way brain chemistry works when it comes to the sexes. It would be remarkable if both sexes had the same approach to problem-solving if indeed the brain chemistry is different for each one.
Doesn't mean one sex cannot do what the other can (and we are talking about abilities and skills, yes?), but it probably means things will get done by different approaches. I suppose if you are particular to one brand of problem-solving it's very likely you will consider the other approach inefficient at best, and plainly wrong at worst.
So I guess my definite answer is that I don't know for sure what I believe about it.

1. Does this happen in your culture? How often? Can you give examples?
2. Do you personally believe in the idea that there a some things a man can do that a woman cannot and visa versa?

Click to expand...

1. Of course. For example, it's virtually impossible to find a male teacher in a Russian school. I had only two male teachers, and both were teaching us for very short time.
2. Why, yes.
For example, I believe that women shouldn't build roads and carry loads in seaports.

A lot of peole think that women should not be in military combat because (to put it bluntly) the war will not stop hjust because her Aunt Flo decided to pay her a visit.

Click to expand...

More than the fact that neither the war nor the world stops when a woman has a period - a fact that a large majority of women already take in their stride - I'd been told by a member of the Armed Forces that the reason why women soldiers aren't normally in frontline fighting is that a male colleague would instinctively find it much more difficult to leave a female colleague to die than a male one, if needs be, and would feel too protective towards her putting his own life in danger for the sake of hers.

That comment stuck in my mind and lends another angle to the sexism idea in the Armed Forces.

<...>I'd been told by a member of the Armed Forces that the reason why women soldiers aren't normally in frontline fighting is that a male colleague would instinctively find it much more difficult to leave a female colleague to die than a male one, if needs be, and would feel too protective towards her putting his own life in danger for the sake of hers.

That comment stuck in my mind and lends another angle to the sexism idea in the Armed Forces.

Click to expand...

Outside the Armed Forces, such behaviour would more likely be seen as an act of chivalry.
But I've always found it pretty strange that in Israel women should serve in the army. It really puzzles me.
At the same time, I have no problem with, erm, policewomen.

If a man can lay down his life (or an enemy's) for his country - why should not a woman be required to do the same?
She lives in the same country, and enjoys the same privileges and benefits of citizenship as her brother.

If a man can lay down his life (or an enemy's) for his country - why should not a woman be required to do the same?
She lives in the same country, and enjoys the same privileges and benefits of citizenship as her brother.

Is it not sexism to preclude her from active duty in the front lines?

Click to expand...

During the Great Patriotic War, many women served in the Army. Most of them were nurses and doctors, but very often they had to fight alongside with men.
But war is an exceptional event, and I don't see why women should serve in army during days of peace. Moreover, I strongly disapprove of women serving in the modern Russian Army.

During the Great Patriotic War, many women served in the Army. Most of them were nurses and doctors, but very often they had to fight alongside with men.
But war is an exceptional event, and I don't see why women should serve in army during days of peace. Moreover, I strongly disapprove of women serving in the modern Russian Army.

The serving conditions are too bad.
There have been numerous cases of violence in the army, of soldiers being tortured by the officers, and so on. Many families pay large sums to save their sons from serving in the army.

The serving conditions are too bad.
There have been numerous cases of violence in the army, of soldiers being tortured by the officers, and so on. Many families pay large sums to save their sons from serving in the army.

Click to expand...

Then why are you not against people serving in the modern Russian Army?

1. Does this happen in your culture? How often? Can you give examples?
2. Do you personally believe in the idea that there a some things a man can do that a woman cannot and visa versa?

Click to expand...

1. Most employers will very carefully avoid any bias that might lead to a court process. Our laws support what USAians might name "equal opportunity".
2. Not by definition, but women because of their statistically lower physical strength would normally be less suited for construction work (counter example: India) or as for example fire fighters. Diametrically opposite, my employer has on repeted occasions tried to hire males for translation coordinators. (They match customers' needs to translators' qualifications etc.) Boys don't last very long. ('Boy': You've gotta be fairly young to withstand the stress.)

"Personally", I believe that the average woman has a superior simultaneous capacity. Think of all the women who raise children, care for the pets, cook the meals, manage the house, and have a professional and/or a political/charity life of their own. How many men do all those things (or even dare to try?)

I tried (no children, though), and was rewarded by a stroke induced brain infarction. My two sisters (a total of 5 lovely nieces/nephews) have been rather more successful in those terms.

During the Great Patriotic War, many women served in the Army. Most of them were nurses and doctors, but very often they had to fight alongside with men.
But war is an exceptional event, and I don't see why women should serve in army during days of peace. Moreover, I strongly disapprove of women serving in the modern Russian Army.

Click to expand...

Etcetera is obviously sexist. She has stated that when needed, women and men fought along side one another. In the event of a future war, they could do so again. If women do not serve in peacetime, they will be ill-trained and inexperienced in time of war, and as a result will likely suffer greater casualties. That is anti-female.

She has also suggested that women should receive favorable treatment in peacetime, not having to suffer the bad conditions of the modern Russian Army, without stating that men should also not have to suffer such conditions. This position favors women during times of peace (sexist in favor of women) and puts them at greater risk in times of war (sexist to the detriment of women).

I think we need to hear opinions from a number of male midwives, and female professional football (US/Canadian style) players.

Of course men can be midwives, and women can play football, but in the former case the clients might not feel especially comfortable, and in the latter case, for purely physical reasons, most women would not fare especially well. It is very difficult to think of any historically "male" job that women can not do well, or a "female" counterpart occupation. Most discrimination and exclusion of women is based on sexism, rather than rationality or fact.

I think we need to hear opinions from a number of male midwives, and female professional football (US/Canadian style) players.

Of course men can be midwives, and women can play football, but in the former case the clients might not feel especially comfortable, and in the latter case, for purely physical reasons, most women would not fare especially well. It is very difficult to think of any historically "male" job that women can not do well, or a "female" counterpart occupation. Most discrimination and exclusion of women is based on sexism, rather than rationality or fact.

Click to expand...

Er, I don't know if Etcetera is sexist - she has not had the opportunity to say whether she approves of men having to put up with bad conditions in the Russian Army either!

My son is a male nurse (well, a student). This year, he is going to be doing obstetrics. Personally, I didn't want any men there when I was giving birth, and I believe that the patient is allowed to state whether she wants any particular person present so he may have difficulty finding cases to follow - on the other hand, I am sure there are women who wouldn't mind. (I had to have a male doctor present, but I would much rather not have had.. still in the 1980s, nobody asked.)

So, I definitely feel agitated every time I hear someone say "men can't be/shouldn't be nurses". They most certainly can and do!

So am I correct in thinking that the job should be blind as to sexal preference? That it should be up to what you can handle? But then, isn't that a little "once upon a time"-sih?

Click to expand...

Absolutely it should! There is the concept of the BFOQ, 'bona-fide occupational qualification' - you couldn't have a man modelling bras in a catlogue, or a woman donating sperm for instance!

However, outside of that there are big beefy woman who can be lifeguards, football coaches and firefighters, and although woman generally have more manual dexterity than men, there are exceptions - jewellers and dentists are mostly men..

Etcetera is obviously sexist. She has stated that when needed, women and men fought along side one another. In the event of a future war, they could do so again. If women do not serve in peacetime, they will be ill-trained and inexperienced in time of war, and as a result will likely suffer greater casualties. That is anti-female.

She has also suggested that women should receive favorable treatment in peacetime, not having to suffer the bad conditions of the modern Russian Army, without stating that men should also not have to suffer such conditions. This position favors women during times of peace (sexist in favor of women) and puts them at greater risk in times of war (sexist to the detriment of women).

Click to expand...

Well, let me tell you that in most countries affected by sexism, it is always on both sides. Women just don`t realise how much they share these stereotypes and as long as everybody is fending just for himself/herself...

However, I would have to agree too that from the point of view of physiology conditions should not always be the same for men and women. Something like what Etcetera said about women carrying weights. Their muscular system is different and also that would simply kill their reproductive abilities. Apart from that... I don`t think I see any excuse for sexism whatsoever.

Oh, please. If a woman is not able to carry weights, then why would she want a job doing so? If she is, then why should she not have a job doing so? Lifting weights does not "kill a woman's reproductive abilities". Further, a woman may not want to reproduce. I can hardly believe I am reading such material in this Forum. This is not just directed at the posts of setwale charm.

It`s a pity Emma you did not see those women in the Third World (and they were there in the middle of the past century in the Soviet land) who had to perform such jobs as carrying enormous weights (men were not there) and what happened to them after that. That normally would not happen to men although there are certainly ways to ruin anybody`s health with certain tasks, you can ask any doctor for that.
Besides. I do not see what your objection is. Nobody`s talking about a woman wanting or not wanting a job like this, she is free to choose as are men who might want or not want to do something traditionally "female" we are talking about the fact that men and women are just physically different in some respects and were made such. This does not in any way affect the amount of respect or rights which are given to anybody. If you don`t like it, please refer your complaint to Mother Nature.

I am well aware that many women and men have been, and are, forced to do things that are detrimental to their health.

We are, indeed, talking about men/women having or not having the "right" to choose, depending on gender. That is why the thread is entitled "Sexism in the World", not "Are Men and Women Physically Different".

One of the most blatant examples of sexism I ever encountered is the following:
(this part is just for giving context) We were talking about women in the police-force and someone said that he thought that police women should not be on beat because they didn't have the physical ability to subdue big guys. When I replied that
a) there are women who are more than able to do so as their physiology (height, musculature etc) is equal if not better than most policemen's I've seen and
b) women who know martial arts well enough to subdue a charging bull

(that's the sexist part) I was told that "muscular women or too aggressive (!!) women are simply not women". I found out later on that he was not alone in thinking so.

While PMing a new-found friend, I somehow or another got on the topic of sexism, meaning judging a person based soley on the fact that they are male or female. I went on to this thread to see if anyone had ideas, and though the topic was close to what I had in mind it wasn't quite what I was thinking.

Here are my thoughts. A lot of peole think that women should not be in military combat because (to put it bluntly) the war will not stop hjust because her Aunt Flo decided to pay her a visit. Others don't think that a man should be a beautician or a nurse or a secretary because that is not manly enough. There are times where a person won't get a job because they are of a certain gender.

My questions to you are these:

1. Does this happen in your culture? How often? Can you give examples?
2. Do you personally believe in the idea that there a some things a man can do that a woman cannot and visa versa?

Click to expand...

I had made a comment earlier about Larry Summers and the comment was deleted as mere chat, so I will explain. The comment was intended to be humerous, and to remind people of the sensitivty that many people have to this subject. Larry Summers is the former president of Harvard University who started a raging controversy and subsequently resigned for comments he made to the effect that men and women have innate cognitive differences. Some have argued that these differences are the reason that men and women are not equally represented in certain academic professions. The counter argument is that the disparity is due to sexism. I'm not sure Mr. Summers necessarily takes the position one way or another on the matter, but I think he was mainly suggesting that it is a legitimate matter for scientific inquiry.

As to the questions, clearly sexism exists. A lot of men view women in general as inferior. The only examples that comes to mind right now are some unrepeatable jokes, but I don't think that men are sexist is a matter much in dispute.

Can a woman do the same job, task, whatever as a man. There is no question in my mind that on an individual basis they can. If you want to generalize about men and women, then I think it is fair to say that there are differences. Men and women are different creatures and have, on average, different innate capabilities. The important thing is to not treat an individual man or women based on the aforementioned average differences. Unfortunately, people do this.

I will add one more thing which was true for me and probably many other men as well. When I was in the work force I did not particularly like working with women. Not because I thought they couldn't do the job or anything like that. It was just that with women, there is always a certain sexual tension lurking in the back of the mind. It made it more difficult to concentrate on work. Clearly, this was my problem and not the womens', but it's there.

If you are child-rearing age, particulaly about 30, all employers are going to be suspicious of a women becoming a mother. The reasons are very simple:

Maternity leave
Disruption to the general workforce
Risk of never returning to work (after all that expensive training)
Disruption to the working day (phonecalls to nannies, doctors appointments, kids are sick, etc.)
Change in life priorities.

But it is tough on the women involved. and there are laws in place in many countries to try and even it up for the mothers and I think a balance is required.

Click to expand...

There are laws in place... that do not work! Interwiewers can still find a way to worm any information they want out of the woman job applicant. But, as far I as know, the Swedish model seems to work quite well in terms of maternity AND paternity leaves...

Otherwise, there is no particular sex discriminations in this country. I saw male nurses and even a "man midwife." The only problem with the last case was a linguistic one: should he have changed the name of his profession into "midhusband"?

I certainly have no problem with legitimate scientific inquiry into cognitive differences between the sexes. Science is science.

Click to expand...

There is a whole can of worms to be opened up here. Perhaps it should be in a new thread. There are differences between the sexes based on biological differences, and there are differences between races, and indeed any gene pools that are not well mixed, which result in scientifically measurable differences.

It is well known in pharmacology as the following quote, which came in a split second's look in google, shows,

The 50% inhibitory concentration (IC[50]) values for T-suppressor cell-trafficking inhibition were higher in whites than in blacks, regardless of sex (by 125% in men and 208% in women, p < 0.01). The IC[50] or SC[50] values for effects of prednisolone on cortisol secretion and T-helper lymphocyte or neutrophil trafficking were not statistically different between men and women, blacks and whites.

More generally it is known that native Americans lack an enzyme used to digest alcohol and so generally become intoxicated on smaller quantities of alcohol.

This research is of obvious importance as it can lead to better treatment regimes with lower risk of side effects.

The trouble is that the underlying premise that we are DIFFERENT by birth goes counter to the philosophical premise that we are ALL BORN EQUAL. It's a very dangerous idea because of the potential extrapolation by racists and sexists who can use it to argue that their empirically observed gender/racial defects are there by genetics and hence by God, or Mother Nature etc.

Of course unless the differences they mark out are scientifically studied they can just be considered the self-serving opinions of a biggot. But what if they are studied? What if we do find out something that can be truly described as a defect? Or that implies that women are unable to do something as well as men, or indeed the reverse? Would that lead to a revival of eugenics? What if the world had to decide whether to have equality for all, despite knowing that it was not the most efficient way? What if the different reaction between sexes or races was used in a form of warfare - a chemical gas that only killed one gene pool.

I think that "legitimate scientific inquiry into cognitive differences between the sexes" or races is perhaps something that the modern world is too immature to deal with. "Science is science" - true, but Man's manipulation of the facts for his own agenda is older still.

Simply because of the priorities of the company are to its shareholders not the well being of its employees. You might argue that thats not fair. Maybe it's not but, its the way it is. You can't blame the company, just the capitalist system.

If you are child-rearing age, particulaly about 30, all employers are going to be suspicious of a women becoming a mother. The reasons are very simple:

Maternity leave
Disruption to the general workforce
Risk of never returning to work (after all that expensive training)
Disruption to the working day (phonecalls to nannies, doctors appointments, kids are sick, etc.)
Change in life priorities.

You can't blame a company for that. But it is tough on the women involved. and there are laws in place in many countries to try and even it up for the mothers and I think a balance is required.

Click to expand...

The same thing in Russia.
My Mum once said that I might have problems with finding myself a job because of my age - many girls in Russia get married in their early 20s.
Indeed, when I came to my work, I find out that a number of girls are on their maternity leaves.
Of course, there are various laws protecting women's rights, but... if the employers wants to dismiss a worker, they will always find a legal reason for that.

A prime example of what I am/was talking about: my best friend went for a job interview a few days ago. She's twenty years old and very attractive. She dressed appropriately and whatnot and has a fantastic resume, especially for someone her age. When the gentleman that was going to interview her came out to greet her, he was reading her resume with a very big smile on his face. When he saw who she was, however, it was apparent that the warm and fuzzy feeling that he felt dissapeared. She just called today and they told her that she did not get the job because they wanted someone with more "experience". (Meanwhile, because of her volunteer work and small temp. jobs she has been working in her profession for a little more than five years.)

A prime example of what I am/was talking about: my best friend went for a job interview a few days ago. She's twenty years old and very attractive. She dressed appropriately and whatnot and has a fantastic resume, especially for someone her age. When the gentleman that was going to interview her came out to greet her, he was reading her resume with a very big smile on his face. When he saw who she was, however, it was apparent that the warm and fuzzy feeling that he felt dissapeared. She just called today and they told her that she did not get the job because they wanted someone with more "experience". (Meanwhile, because of her volunteer work and small temp. jobs she has been working in her profession for a little more than five years.)

Click to expand...

Your friend may have been refused the job for any number of reasons:

—another, or other, better suited applicants were interviewed
—a more experienced applicant was hired
—she did or said something in the interview that created doubt or discomfort on the part of the potential employer.

Perhaps she was the best qualified, did nothing wrong, and was not hired for the reasons you imply.

That's all speculation.

Anecdotal assumptions of sexism do not demonstrate, much less 'prove', sexism.

A smart employer will suit her or his own self-interest by hiring the best qualified applicant.
A not-so-smart or stupid or bigoted employer may hire somebody other that the best qualified applicant. That your friend has a fine resume and other characteristics of age and appearance, and did not receive a job offer, is not sufficient evidence to accuse an employer of sexism.
That is sloppy reasoning.

1. Does this happen in your culture?
Are you kidding me?! Yes, it happens. Latin America does not have this reputation of being the land of chauvinism just out of nothing! Venezuela is a crazy mingle, and an eternal contradiction (see why I'm like this, guys? ), so you have both discrimination, and sexist/anti-sexist (is there any difference?) 'responses' to such discrimination.

-How often?
Every day.

-Can you give examples?
Sure. Here, there are some un-written rules on the matter. (Disclaimer: What you are about to read by no means expresses the forera's thoughts on the matter, it only represents the way society states it in Venezuela, and shall remain solely under the country's liability.)

(a) No man can be a hairdresser, a model, a receptionist, a secretary, a professional dancer, a nurse, a kindergarden teacher, or a fashion designer (among some others). Unless he's gay, of course. And there are hundreds of gay guys out there totally willing to keep up the stereotypes... Oh, and every 'metrosexual' around, willing to have his nails done and get the highlights, is under severe risk of being called "danceeeeerrr!!" in the middle of the street. A major offense, no doubt.

(b) No woman can be a firefighter, a police officer, a plumber, a car repairperson, join the national guard, the army, the garbage collection service, or any other job that requires more physical effort than it would take to change a diaper, could potentially ruin her manicure, or could eventually impede her to prepare dinner on time for her hubby.

2. Do you personally believe in the idea that there a some things a man can do that a woman cannot and visa versa?
Not sure how to answer this without making somebody upset. I just think everything is relative.

For example, if a woman really wants to be, say, a firefighter, she likes the profession, considers all the pros and cons, prepares herself physically as well as professionally and psychologically for it, then why the heck not? But if she is not prepared for it, then why the heck doing it? Again, wouldn't this apply to men as well?

I know plenty of women who are ten times better prepared than many men to be a police officer, a trainperson, a taxi driver, or any other job that is considered to be "for men only". I just can't understand why in the world not giving those women the chance, and giving it to an underprepared guy, just because he's a man! But also, it would be a mistake giving an underprepared woman the job just because she is a woman and "thou shalt not be sexist".

In other words, I think the job and the fair salary should go to the one who can do the job, do it right, and not be waving a sexist/anti-sexist flag all around in order to get it/keep it.

Enough about that... Now I suggest you guys to take a look at this thread: Mujer moderna/modern woman and relax a little. It's not like: "geez, that's precisely what we're talking about!!", but it's somewhat related. Have fun!

In other words, I think the job and the fair salary should go to the one who can do the job, do it right, and not be waving a sexist/anti-sexist flag all around in order to get it/keep it.

Click to expand...

Well, I think "sexism" takes different forms according to the law people have to cope with and the cultural values that go with it. One of my friend COULD have the job she wanted, just because she denied having 3 children at home... afterwards, her daily life was a true hell. Afterwards, her husband had to manadge free time for the children. But, HE was NOT sanctioned for being often absent of his work... and this is not something taken out of fancy.

Well, I think "sexism" takes different forms according to the law people have to cope with and the cultural values that go with it.

Click to expand...

You're freakin' right. But honestly, that's not what I had in mind. What I meant was simple: I think an anti-sexist woman can almost unadvertidly slip into (feminist) sexism within the blink of an eye...

Not that every anti-sexist woman does so, nor that fighting against what you consider unfair is wrong. Just a little comment, based upon what I've seen around.

PS: Please, this is not the main "debate" here. It was just a side-remark in response to the main topic, which I believe has been (very) clearly stated by Poetic Device already.

—another, or other, better suited applicants were interviewed
—a more experienced applicant was hired
—she did or said something in the interview that created doubt or discomfort on the part of the potential employer.

Perhaps she was the best qualified, did nothing wrong, and was not hired for the reasons you imply.

That's all speculation.

Anecdotal assumptions of sexism do not demonstrate, much less 'prove', sexism.

A smart employer will suit her or his own self-interest by hiring the best qualified applicant.
A not-so-smart or stupid or bigoted employer may hire somebody other that the best qualified applicant. That your friend has a fine resume and other characteristics of age and appearance, and did not receive a job offer, is not sufficient evidence to accuse an employer of sexism.
That is sloppy reasoning.

Click to expand...

YOu are right, and I apologize, but why then would the smile turn into a scowl the minute he looked at her?

I don't consider deeply personal questions to be appropriate in an interview. Questions such as, "Do you have a boyfriend?" for example.

However, to gauge a prospective employee's potential, I fully approve of asking questions about interests and hobbies. This gives the candidate an opporunity to speak at some length and can give the employer a clue as to the personality of the candidate.

1. Does this happen in your culture?
Are you kidding me?! Yes, it happens. Latin America does not have this reputation of being the land of chauvinism just out of nothing! Venezuela is a crazy mingle, and an eternal contradiction (see why I'm like this, guys? ), so you have both discrimination, and sexist/anti-sexist (is there any difference?) 'responses' to such discrimination.

-How often?
Every day.

Click to expand...

This woman has not been to Russia as yet. But, seriously, this is interesting. I always had an impression at the same time that Latin American sexism is very different in its nature from let`s say, Arabic. Latin American women, quite similarly to Russian women, tend to be very strong at once, they often bring up children on their own while making a career and many seem to be rather...assertive, even bossy.

This woman has not been to Russia as yet. But, seriously, this is interesting. I always had an impression at the same time that Latin American sexism is very different in its nature from let`s say, Arabic. Latin American women, quite similarly to Russian women, tend to be very strong at once, they often bring up children on their own while making a career and many seem to be rather...assertive, even bossy.

Click to expand...

Well, I don't personally know too many women from Russia (and even if I did, is that a basis for a generalization?).

Our society is very, very chauvinist, but yet, it is a matriarchy (am I using this word correctly? ).

Down here, women must be super-women and be in charge of everything. It is women's duty to be always: pretty, great employee/boss, perfect housewife, better mother, even better wife/girlfriend/lover/mistress/whatever-the-man-in-her-life-wants, smart, graduated from at least one universitarian career, in perfect body shape, and of course be careful not to have wrinkles, nor stretch-marks, nor god-forbid cellulitis! And even being so impossibly perfect (if no nerve collapse beats the poor girl in the meantime), it is still socially acceptable for the man to have another woman, you know, just in case...

The result: some (well, a considerable amount) of Venezuelan women are what here we call "cuaimas" (a species of snake ). That is, stunning women with integral personalities and countless capacities, that generally scare out men, or at least, dominate the ones who dare to come any close. The amazing thing is that you can find "cuaimas" everywhere, talking to their girlfriends and telling things like "Of course I didn't take that! You know I'm a cuaima, so I almost swallowed him alive!! No man ain't taking me for no fool!"

No, and as far as I know any such questions which might elicit answers about having children, or tending to sick relatives or such like are illegal in Irish employment law.

Click to expand...

Those questions are illegal here, too. But since the whole legal system is nothing but a big black spot of corruption in this land of bureaucratic nepotism, it is of no use to even mind the question...

By the way, I'm trying to remember one single job interview in which I have not been asked "are you married?", "do you have a boyfriend?", or "do you have any children?", and I think the only one was precisely the one I had with my current boss. Ironically, I am about to get married and will probably switch to a part-time job...

I'm trying to figure out how and how often men are discriminated against when it comes to a profession. I know it happens... Can I hear from that?

Click to expand...

Not in Venezuela, I think. Or at least, not that I've heard of. Women are (in general lines) responsible for the kids, the housekeeping, sick relatives, and every other thing that an employer could possibly "concern" about, so what could possibly be the basis of discrimination against men?

Although there are some professions that are considered "women's stuff" (see post Nº 38), but it's not like the future employer would ask the male applicant "are you gay?", or something like that...

I'm trying to figure out how and how often men are discriminated against when it comes to a profession. I know it happens... Can I hear from that?

Click to expand...

There have been quite a few kerfuffles in the UK on religious grounds. Muslim women are not allowed to be intimately examined by a male doctor, even if he were the top obstetrician/gynaecologist in the land.

So, if a female doctor isn't available, the patient has to be sent to a hospital where there is one.

This is discrimination within a profession. But if that is the Muslim way, then I see nothing wrong with it.

I always had an impression at the same time that Latin American sexism is very different in its nature from let`s say, Arabic. Latin American women, quite similarly to Russian women, tend to be very strong at once, they often bring up children on their own while making a career and many seem to be rather...assertive, even bossy.

Click to expand...

I'd wager that that's a relatively recent thing. In the old days, Latin women were very much put (well, forced into) 'their place'.

I'd wager that that's a relatively recent thing. In the old days, Latin women were very much put (well, forced into) 'their place'.

Click to expand...

It depends on what you call "recent". For more information, check out this link. It started as a joke (in Spanish), but it turned more and more serious with every post (and more and more English was added in, too).